This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Khoikhoi (talk | contribs) at 04:57, 18 March 2006 (great). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 04:57, 18 March 2006 by Khoikhoi (talk | contribs) (great)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Hello Parishan and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Hope you like it here, and stick around.
Here are some tips to help you get started:
- To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
- Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
- If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
- Follow the Misplaced Pages:Simplified Ruleset
- Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
- Remember Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view
- Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!
Good luck!
Three-revert rule
You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule, which states that no one can revert more than 3 times in 24 hours. --Khoikhoi 04:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- ---
- You are doing the same thing. Seriously, can't we compromise on this? Why do you have to stick that ambiguous "Turkic people" detail when you can just avoid it?
- I haven't reverted more than 3 times however. The article has said "Turkic people" for almost two years. What kind of compromise do you suggest? --Khoikhoi 04:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest that we don't mention the roots/the "who they are now" thing (Turkic, Iranian, Caucasian - doesn't matter) at all due to its high ambiguity. In the discussion section you can see for yourself, that many Azeris simply refuse to concur with that statement. So why not just take it out without replacing it by anything else?
- Ok, good idea. We'll see what people think of it tomorrow, but for now instead of having "Turkic-speaking people" just say "ethinc group". --Khoikhoi 04:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent. I'm perfectly fine with that.
- Great. How does it look now? Any other things needing to be fixed? --Khoikhoi 04:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent. I'm perfectly fine with that.
- Ok, good idea. We'll see what people think of it tomorrow, but for now instead of having "Turkic-speaking people" just say "ethinc group". --Khoikhoi 04:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest that we don't mention the roots/the "who they are now" thing (Turkic, Iranian, Caucasian - doesn't matter) at all due to its high ambiguity. In the discussion section you can see for yourself, that many Azeris simply refuse to concur with that statement. So why not just take it out without replacing it by anything else?
- I haven't reverted more than 3 times however. The article has said "Turkic people" for almost two years. What kind of compromise do you suggest? --Khoikhoi 04:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)